Obama won 90+ supports from afro American community

Parent Cafe
21

<p>

</p>

<p>If a white candidate had never enjoyed 90% of the black vote in an election, maybe you could claim racism on the part of blacks. If blacks only voted for black candidates, no matter what, and to the exclusion of all else, you could most certainly claim racism. But neither of these scenarios is the case. </p>

<p>Blacks almost never think, "I’m not voting for So 'n So because he/she is white. Blacks are use to voting for white candidates, and have been known to throw their support (yes, by 80-90% and higher) behind a single white candidate (always a Democrat). The Clintons have been use to just such overwhelming support from the black community, which is why it must have been galling to find out that they could no longer take that support for granted. </p>

<p>Contrast that with whites who state they will not vote for a black candidate ** because** he is black—who say so quite unashamedly. Racism is the belief that one race is inherently superior to another or other races, and that political and social policy should reflect that belief. Throughout the history of The United States, it has been the white race that has held that it is inherently superior to all other races, especially the black race. Until roughly the last 30-40 years of our country’s 300+ year history, this belief was held to be so axiomatic that all of society was structured to reinforce it. So, it has only been relatively recently that a black candidate has even been on the ballot for an elected position of importance. Until relatively recently, race alone would have been deemed an absolute disqualifier. </p>

<p>Black people aren’t voting for Barack Obama just because he is black, and Hillary Clinton’s race is not being seen as a “disqualifier”. Black people aren’t thinking, I’m not voting for that woman because she is white, and therefore inferior. They are voting for Barack Obama because he is a symbol of hope, and inspiration, a person of historical significance who excites a sense of possibility within the black community. He is a democrat (an absolute prerequisite, as far as most blacks are concerned) who embodies everything blacks have always admired in The Clintons, AND he represents an opportunity that has heretofore been historically denied. You had best believe that if he were a black republican, he would be viewed with deep suspicion, even resentment, and would in no way be enjoying such widespread support within the community. Black skin alone won’t earn you the black vote! White skin is not seen as a disqualifier. Black people are not voting against whiteness, but for hope.</p>

22

<p>One comment about voting against a black candidate: I’m not sure it would be racist to vote against a candidate who appeared to be only, or primarily, running to represent the interests of black people. I think the Clintons made an effort to portray Obama as such a candidate, but it’s clear he isn’t. But I think it might be fair to think of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton as such a candidate.</p>

23

<p>

</p>

<p>Which is why so many black voters felt so insulted by Bill’s apparent attempts to do so. I don’t know of a single black person who feels that Obama is a candidate in the vein of Al or Jesse. That’s one of the reasons blacks are so excited by his candidacy.</p>

<p>I agree Hunt, that it would not be racist to vote against a candidate who appeared to be running primarily in the interests of a single race of people, which is why blacks have historically voted against Republicans. The prevailing belief within the black community has long been that Republicans are only for rich white people—which is why black Republicans are often viewed with open disdain.</p>

24

<p>There’s no evidence that Obama and Sharpton are not closely aligned. </p>

<p>Also by associating himself for 20 years with the black nationalist preacher, he has made a statement about his priorities and clearly he represents a form of black nationalism, which throws him into racial politics.</p>

<p>I just hate to see the Democats run another hopeless campiagn, like they did with McGovern, Dukakis, and Kerry. But they have gotten themselves in a real mess now. The money could go to much better causes.</p>

25

<p>“Which is why so many black voters felt so insulted by Bill’s apparent attempts to do so. I don’t know of a single black person who feels that Obama is a candidate in the vein of Al or Jesse. That’s one of the reasons blacks are so excited by his candidacy.”</p>

<p>But plenty of other people feel this way, of many races.</p>

26

<p>plenty of people are also half witted, too. I mean, a large portion of this population can’t find the atlantic ocean on a world map.</p>

27

<p>“There’s no evidence that Obama and Sharpton are not closely aligned.”</p>

<p>There’s no evidence that Obama and the planet Venus are not closely aligned. Does that make it true?</p>

28

<p>

</p>

<p>The onus is upon the accuser. The prosecution must prove its case. Where’s your proof, nameneeded?</p>

29

<p>

I always wonder how ultra-liberals can be so smart and so idiotic at the same time.</p>

30

<p>

Then I think those friends are wrong and anyone who is “ultra (liberal or conservative)” typically has skewed views anyway IMO. For the Dems this time it’s a ‘no win’ in this regard since I suppose these ‘ultra’ people will claim ‘racist’ for anyone who doesn’t vote for Obama and ‘sexist’ for anyone who doesn’t vote for Hillary - i.e. there’s no result that will appease them. </p>

<p>For the record, I and my conservative friends have discussed various possible candidates and not one of them cares at all about race or gender - they care about views, experience, record, etc. I suspect this is true for most people both conservative and liberal. Not all, but most.</p>

31

<p>Well, ucsd dad, if people truly didn’t care about race or gender, we would have had either a non-white or a female president a long time ago.</p>

<p>I’m not saying your friends are racist or sexist. I’m saying we as a society haven’t yet come CLOSE to electing someone other than a white guy. How close we can come now will be revealed in November.</p>

32

<p>You all are right about Sharpton and Obama.See below. But maybe Obama will have to buy him off with the promise of a government appointment.</p>

<p>SHARPTON RAPS OBAMA
By CHUCK BENNETT and KAVITA MOKHA
April 29, 2008 –</p>

<p>Barack Obama made a call for nonviolence in the aftermath of the Sean Bell verdict - infuriating the Rev. Al Sharpton, who accused the presidential candidate of trying to “grandstand in front of white people,” sources told The Post.</p>

<p>During what a source described as a “heated” phone call yesterday, Sharpton told Obama he was disappointed with the Illinois senator’s words on Friday, when Obama said “resorting to violence to express displeasure” was “completely unacceptable and counterproductive.”</p>

<p>“[Obama] issues this statement and not a single rock had been thrown,” said a source. “How does the candidate of change ask people to accept a verdict that is unjust?”</p>

<p>The source said Sharpton had hoped Obama would “side with the Bell family” and not use it as an “opportunity to grandstand in front of white people.”</p>

<p>An Obama spokesman described the conversation as a chance to “hear [Sharpton’s] views and to get his perspective.”</p>

<p>Sharpton ratcheted up the pressure on federal prosecutors yesterday by bringing Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, to Kalua, the Queens strip club where the Nov. 25, 2006 shooting took place.</p>

<p>“We are going to put together a federal strategy on how to deal with the case,” Conyers said.</p>

<p>Also yesterday, Queens Supreme Court Justice Arthur Cooperman, who rendered the not-guilty verdict, refused to comment on his decision.</p>

<p>“He said what he had to say on the bench,” his law clerk said.</p>

33

<p>“For the record, I and my conservative friends have discussed various possible candidates and not one of them cares at all about race or gender - they care about views, experience, record, etc. I suspect this is true for most people both conservative and liberal. Not all, but most.”</p>

<p>I would guess that your friends are for the most part educated. I work in a swing state with “Reagan Democrats” and not one of them will say anything good about Obama. At least here, I don’t think he has a chance. These voters will vote McCain if it is Obama vs McCain. They just can’t stand Obama, and they just don’t trust him. There have been too many things going on that were questionable with him.</p>

34

<p>katliamom:
It’s true unfortunately, that some people do care about the race and gender of the candidate but there’s progress. There are enough people of various races and genders in high level political postions now that I don’t think most people would even blink at the fact that a particular member of congress or high level presidential appointed position isn’t a white male. I think it’s now considered fairly normal so people can focus on real issues rather than attributes that the candidate has no control over (race, gender, ancestry, height, handicaps, etc.) and are largely irrelevant. </p>

<p>However, back to the OP’s question, I don’t think it would be fair to conclude that if Obama loses to Hillary it’s due to racism or if Hillary loses to Obama it’s due to sexism or if either loses to McCain that it’s due to either racism or sexism.</p>

35

<p>“not one of them cares at all about race or gender”</p>

<p>It’s possible to care about race and gender in ways that are evil, and it’s possible to care about race and gender in ways that are benign.</p>

<p>It’s absurd to equate a voter who thinks, “I’ll never put a n***** in the White House as long as I live” with a voter who thinks, “Wow, it would be so healing for this country to have a black president.” Being race-aware is not the same as being racist. That’s why it’s not news, and not bigotry, that black voters strongly prefer Obama.</p>

36

<p>nameneeded:
Yes, these friends are educated and are in California but just because they don’t view Obama or Hillary as an appealing candidate doesn’t mean it’s related to their race or gender. These same friends didn’t have much good to say about Kerry or Gore either. I think if Colin Powell, Condi Rice, or others whose views might be more aligned with theirs happened to be running they’d have plenty of good things to say about them.</p>

37

<p>Hanna:</p>

<p>I understand your points and agree that those two perspectives you gave don’t equate, although I think the point where we’d all like to eventually end up is when it truly doesn’t matter.</p>

38

<p>“Yes, these friends are educated and are in California but just because they don’t view Obama or Hillary as an appealing candidate doesn’t mean it’s related to their race or gender. These same friends didn’t have much good to say about Kerry or Gore either. I think if Colin Powell, Condi Rice, or others whose views might be more aligned with theirs happened to be running they’d have plenty of good things to say about them.”</p>

<p>I think this is true to a certain extent with these “Reagan Democrats.” Obama just doesn’t do well with the working class people that I know. I also think Colin Powell would be different. They didn’t react well to the Reverend Wright association, and they just don’t like him at all, in fact, they make a face when he is mentioned as if he is some kind of joke. They like Clinton more, but if Obama is the candidate, I have no doubt that my swing state will go for McCain.</p>